Forensic psychopathology WF-PS-N-PPS

Knowledge: A student possesses knowledge of the symptoms of mental and psychopathological disorders, with regard to the juridical aspect (criminal cases, civil cases, juvenile cases). Can identify specific mental disorders, their symptoms and effects they can have on human behaviour. The student knows the basics of the aetiology of mental disorders, takes into account the endogenous, biological, environmental and social factors. Student possesses knowledge of the rules of psychiatric diagnostics, identifies unusual states in forensic psychiatry and psychology.
Skills: A student identifies classes of mental disorders, can categorise and classify psychopathological information and on their basis, he or she can make diagnostic and juridical opinions. He or she can use the diagnostic classification system, knows the importance of additional tests for the assessment of a mental state. Student analyses the relationship between mental states of the examined person and specifics relating to his or her court case.
Capacity: A student takes precautions and responsibility when formulating psychopathological opinions. He or she is engaged in a constructive discussion about diagnostics and juridical expertise. A student is aware of the relationship between the expert’s conclusions and juridical consequences as well as aims at being objective in his or her assessment, is creative and open to working in a team of experts.

ECTS:
Taking part in a lecture – 30 hours
Preparations for lectures – 30 hours
Consultations – 10 hours
Preparation for an exam – 50 hours
Sum of hours – 120 [120 : 30 (25) = 4]
Number of ECTS – 4.

Knowledge:
(2): A student does not possess knowledge on the symptoms of mental disorders, cannot characterise specific mental disorders, know neither their aetiology nor basic rules of diagnostics in psychiatry.
(3): A student possesses general knowledge on the symptoms of mental disorders, can list some psychopathological disorders, but is unable to characterise them precisely, has general knowledge on the aetiology of mental disorders, but does not possess any knowledge on unusual states in psychiatry.
(4): A student has a good knowledge of general and specific psychopathology. Identifies specific mental disorders, however, he cannot describe their impact on human behaviour at all times. Knows basics of the aetiology of mental disorders. Possesses knowledge on diagnostics in psychiatry and can list unusual states in forensic psychiatry and psychology.
(5): A student has an excellent knowledge of general and specific psychopathology, can explain how mental disorders affect human behaviour. Knows basics of the aetiology of mental disorders and notices relationships between different aetiological factors. Possesses knowledge of the rules of diagnostics in psychiatry. Can point out differences between unusual states in forensic psychiatry and psychology and explain their importance to the juridical assessment.
Skills:
(2): A student can neither independently identify and classify psychopathological symptoms nor make diagnostic conclusions. Does not know the classification of mental disorders.
(3): A student does not always notice the symptoms of a mental disorder in the juridical material. Can only formulate diagnostic conclusions, without taking into account the diagnostic criteria and specifics of a particular court case. Cannot use them in juridical expertise. Inadequately relates mental states of a specific person to specifics of his or her court case.
(4): A student correctly identifies most of the psychopathological symptoms in juridical material, formulates diagnostic conclusions based on diagnostic classification; can see how additional tests can be used in the diagnostic processes. Sees a need to use the psychopathological knowledge while preparing juridical expertise.
(5): A student excellently identifies the symptoms of mental disorders in juridical material, classifies them based on diagnostic guidance and consequently formulates juridical expertise with justification, uses additional tests in the diagnostic processes. Always analyses the relationship between mental states of an examined person and specifics of the court case.
Capacity:
(2): A student is unaware of the limits to the diagnostic process. Formulates conclusions in a careless and irresponsible manner. Does not see the need for a substantive discussion. Draws conclusions based only on the partial material.
(3): A student is aware of the limits of diagnostic and juridical work but does not attempt at minimising them. Formulates conclusions hastily and does not take into consideration the juridical consequences. Is not always ready to work in a team, does not comment on the opinions of other experts.
(4): A student is aware of the limits of diagnostic and juridical work and takes them into consideration when formulating opinions. Is aware of the influence of expertise on the development of the court case. Aims at objectivism in his assessment of the juridical material. Is ready to work with a team of experts, but does not always comment on other experts’ conclusions.
(5): A student always approaches the juridical material with care and responsibility, is deeply involved in a constructive discussion about the diagnosis and juridical opinions. Aims at explaining all ambiguities and contradictions in the material. Is fully aware of the importance of expertise to the development of the court case. Aims at being objective in his assessment is open to teamwork with other experts and constructive polemics with other experts.

Effect of knowledge:
Didactic method - problem-based lectures, multi-media presentations, case studies, discussions.
Verification - written exam.

Effect of skills:
Didactic method - short presentations given by students, case studies, situational method, discussion of the round table
Verification - discussion, written exam.

Effect of capacity:
Didactic method - case studies, situational method, discussion of the round table, simulation.
Verification: discussion, consultations.

Bilikiewicz A. (red.): Psychiatria. Podręcznik dla studentów medycyny. Wydawnictwo Lekarskie PZWL, Warszawa 2003.
Bilikiewicz A., Pużyński S., Rybakowski J., Wciórka J. (red.): Psychiatria. T. 1-3, Urban & Partner, Wrocław 2002.
Cierpiałkowska L.: Psychopatologia. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar. Warszawa 2009.
Gałecki P., Święcicki Ł. (red.): Kryteria diagnostyczne z DSM-5. Urban & Partner, Wrocław 2015.
Gierowski J. K., Szymusik A. (red.): Postępowanie karne i cywilne wobec osób zaburzonych psychicznie. Collegium Medicum, Kraków, 1996.
Gierowski J. K., Paprzycki L. K.: Niepoczytalność i psychiatryczne środki zabezpieczające. Zagadnienia prawno-materialne, procesowe, psychiatryczne i psychologiczne. Wydawnictwo C. H. Beck, Warszawa 2013.
Heitzman J. Stres w etiologii przestępstwa agresywnych. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, Kraków 2002.
Jakubik A. Zaburzenia osobowości. Wydawnictwo Lekarskie PZWL, Warszawa 1997.
Klasyfikacja zaburzeń psychicznych i zaburzeń zachowania w ICD-10. UWM „Vesalius”- IPiN, Kraków - Warszawa 1997.
Lew-Starowicz Z. : Seksuologia sądowa. Wydawnictwo Lekarskie PZWL, Warszawa, 2000.
Majchrzyk Z. : Nieletni, młodociani i dorośli sprawcy zabójstw. IPiN, Warszawa, 2001.
Majchrzyk Z. : Zabójczynie i zabójcy. Wydawnictwo UKSW, Warszawa, 2008.
Pospiszyl K. Psychopatie. Wydawnictwo Akademickie Żak. Warszawa 2000.

Additional information (registration calendar, class conductors, localization and schedules of classes), might be available in the USOSweb system:

• Description of WF-PS-N-PPS in USOSweb